KULDIP SINGH SURI Vs. SURINDER SINGH KALRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a suit for specific performance and possession.

(2.) The dispute between the parties relates to property No.B-1/16, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. The property is built upon plot measuring 600 sq. yards. The land belongs to the President of India. According to the plaintiff, the lease of this land along with some other plots of land were granted by the President of India in favour of the Government Servants Co-operative House Building Society Ltd (hereinafter referred to as the society). The plaintiff is a member of this society. By a tri-partite agreement (hereinafter called the sub-lease agreement) dated April 1, 1969, executed between the President of India (the lessor), the society (the lessee) and the plaintiff, the sub-lease of the above said plot was granted in favour of the plaintiff for a period of 99 years. As per clause 6 of the sub-lease agreement, the sub-lessee was not to sell, transfer, assign or otherwise part with the possession of the whole or any part of the residential plot without the prior consent in writing of the lessor. That apart, the sub-lease agreement required the sub-lessee to construct a residential premises on the subject plot within two years from April 1, 1969, which is the date of the execution of the said sub-lease agreement. It is the case of the plaintiff that due to exigencies of his service and paucity of funds he was not in a position to undertake the construction of a residential building on the said plot of land & owing to these circumstances he entered into a Building Construction Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the construction agreement) with the defendants on March 6, 1978. It required the defendants to construct a residential building at the cost of Rs.5 lakhs in accordance with the sanctioned plan, which was to be got prepared by the defendants. It also required the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.1,82,500.00 to the plaintiff as security deposit for carrying out their contractual obligations. As against this, the plaintiff was required to pay to the defendants a sum of Rs.6.25 lakhs, Rs.5 lakhs as the cost of construction and Rs.1.25 lakhs as the profit of the defendants, after the defendants obtain a completion certificate of the building from the concerned authority and notify the acquisition thereof to the plaintiff as per clause 13 of the construction agreement. Besides the above said amount of Rs.6.25 lakhs, the plaintiff was also required to return the security deposit of Rs.1,82,500.00 to the defendants. In the event of failure of the plaintiff to make the above said payments to the defendants within one month from the receipt of notice, in terms of clause 13 of the agreement, the plaintiff would cease to have any claim or interest in the building.

(3.) The defendants constructed a two and a half storeyed residential building on the said plot of land. They, without obtaining a completion certificate, occupied the ground floor of the building. They also let out the first floor thereof. The plaintiff claims that by a letter dated 12th May, 1981 he remonstrated to the defendants for their failure to furnish the completion certificate of the building. He also called upon them to hand over the possession of the property to him. But the defendants did not accede to his demand. The plaintiff further claims that he issued another letter dated 21st July, 1981 to the defendants repeating its earlier demand and also asking them to render accounts so that he could pay the expenses incurred by them on the construction of the building. Not receiving any favourable response from the defendants, the plaintiff on April 26, 1984 filed the instant suit seeking a decree for specific performance of the aforesaid agreement and for a direction to the defendants to deliver the actual physical vacant possession of the suit property.